Industry mentors in WIL assessment: revealing systemic contradictions through CHAT

Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) assessment presents persistent challenges in aligning the goals, roles and expectations of higher education institutions (HEIs) and industry. This paper revisits qualitative data from a doctoral study on industry mentors’ roles in WIL assessment, applying Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) to re-analyse the systemic contradictions shaping these partnerships. Drawing on 23 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders across two HEIs, the study uses Activity Systems Analysis (ASA) to map interacting university and industry systems. The re-analysis reveals how contradictions in rules, tools, community dynamics and division of labour create barriers to shared ownership of assessment. Mentors often supervise daily yet remain marginal to grading decisions, while academics express concerns about assessment control, legitimacy and trust. CHAT highlights that such tensions are not isolated problems but structurally embedded issues, requiring re-mediation of assessment practices. The findings suggest institutional strategies including co-design of assessment artefacts, joint training, clearer rules and realignment of assessment responsibilities. By treating WIL assessment as a collective, mediated practice, this paper contributes to conceptual and practical discussions on how more equitable, effective HEI-industry assessment partnerships can be developed.